3 ms·

This comment by @stupidcar (December 5, 2017) [1] from the first Parceljs post seems pertinent. I’m not pasting the entire comment; visit the link below to read

by AnonHP 5y ago

This comment by @stupidcar (December 5, 2017) [1] from the first Parceljs post seems pertinent. I’m not pasting the entire comment; visit the link below to read it: > The eternal cycle of developer tool bullshit: > 1. "Ugh, OldTool™ v3.0.0 is overcomplicated, bloated, slow and unnecessarily configurable!" > 2. "Introducing SuperTool™ v1.0.0, which just does the stuff you really need. No bloated configuration. No huge ecosystem of extensions. Simple, straightforward and fast." > 3. "SuperTool™ v1.0.0 is great! But our setup really needs it to do something a bit different, so we've hacked in this extension." > ...repeat for a while... > 10. "Introducing SuperTool™ v2.0.0, which now has a more flexible API and configuration , allowing many former hacks to be done in a straightforward way." > … [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15853907 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15853907

duiker101 5y ago
The other day I was playing around with parcel V2 and I ended up having to write a config file for something that I believe was included in v1... The whole point of parcel for me was avoiding config files... I feel like this release is missing the point
- FinalBriefing 5y ago
  I think they discovered that if a library tries to provide "zero config", users quickly end up needing to configure something, or reconfigure something else. I still don't think that Parcel is right for me given how comfortable I am with Webpack, but I welcome a "simpler config" option. Provide language support, but don't assume I want to use Babel, or PostCSS, or any other build tool.
repsilat 5y ago
I guess the whiggish interpretation is that if each step is an improvement then the cycle represents steady progress, if not arrived at as directly as could be hoped. Maybe a cynic says that the extensions are negative-sum, or the rewrite is (either to adopting teams, or to a fragmented wider community.) I'm an optimist, though admittedly entirely ignorant of this project. I think some capacity is sometimes lost when new projects are started with new technologies that don't live up to their predecessors, but that accusations of tool choice being fashion-driven are mostly misplaced. There are real, tangible, frequent improvements, and disruption is probably the price of innovation. And it's a price you can mostly avoid paying if you want to keep using what you're using.

by AnonHP 5y ago

duiker101 5y ago

The other day I was playing around with parcel V2 and I ended up having to write a config file for something that I believe was included in v1... The whole point of parcel for me was avoiding config files... I feel like this release is missing the point

FinalBriefing 5y ago
I think they discovered that if a library tries to provide "zero config", users quickly end up needing to configure something, or reconfigure something else. I still don't think that Parcel is right for me given how comfortable I am with Webpack, but I welcome a "simpler config" option. Provide language support, but don't assume I want to use Babel, or PostCSS, or any other build tool.

repsilat 5y ago

I guess the whiggish interpretation is that if each step is an improvement then the cycle represents steady progress, if not arrived at as directly as could be hoped. Maybe a cynic says that the extensions are negative-sum, or the rewrite is (either to adopting teams, or to a fragmented wider community.) I'm an optimist, though admittedly entirely ignorant of this project. I think some capacity is sometimes lost when new projects are started with new technologies that don't live up to their predecessors, but that accusations of tool choice being fashion-driven are mostly misplaced. There are real, tangible, frequent improvements, and disruption is probably the price of innovation. And it's a price you can mostly avoid paying if you want to keep using what you're using.